Posted 4 years ago on Aug. 20, 2012, 12:40 a.m. EST by DouglasAdams
(208)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Occupy Movements worldwide were inspired by the Egyptian Arab Spring. What started as organized anarchy, more or less, held elections that selected the Muslim Brotherhood backed candidate to head of the new Egyptian government, Muhammad Morsi.

A reactionary anti-western Muslim Brotherhood jihad has crashed the hopes and expectations of a liberal democracy that a Facebook-socialized-networked revolution had enabled.

In Egypt there was a period of violent confrontation with the state staging violent opposition against unarmed civilians. Muburak was overthrown. The Egyptian revolt is considered to have successfully overthrown the government. The frustrated protesters are still trying to form a new Egyptian government of their design even after electing the Muslim Brotherhood backed candidate.

They may have been better off under Mubarak. The Arab Spring takeover of Egypt by the Muslim Brotherhood has run amok, with reports from several different media agencies that the radical Muslims have begun crucifying opponents of newly installed President Mohammed Morsi. The victims can be anyone, including Egyptian Christians. “It’s anyone who is resisting the new government,” Ibrahim, Egyptian news correspondent, said. “In this particular case, the people attacked and crucified were secular protesters upset because of Morsi’s hostile campaign against the media, especially of Tawfik Okasha, who was constantly exposing him on his station, until Morsi shut him down.”

To date, rulers have been forced from power in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Yemen; civil uprisings have erupted in Bahrain and Syria; major protests have broken out in Algeria, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco and Sudan; and minor protests have occurred in Lebanon, Mauritania, Oman, Saudi Arabia, and Western Sahara, as well as clashes at the borders of Israel in May 2011. In neighboring Iran, protests by the Arab minority in Khuzestan erupted in 2011 as well. Weapons and Tuareg fighters returning from the Libyan civil war stoked a simmering rebellion in Mali, and the consequent Malian coup d'état has been described as "fallout" from the Arab Spring in North Africa. The sectarian clashes in Lebanon were described as a direct result of the Syrian uprising and hence the regional Arab Spring.

What happened to the United States' implicit mission to support democracies everywhere? Organizing sanctions against an Iran with nuclear ambition is a response to contain radical Islam republics and protect freedom everywhere. Investigations and reports of Egyptian crucifixions in the 21st century should evoke a similar response towards Egypt. Crucifying Christians or anyone else is miles beneath anything Sadam Hussein had done. Even Hitler didn’t do that. We have given Egypt more foreign aid than any other country in the world except Israel, Afghanistan and Iraq. This is what Islam is capable of. The misadventure to rescue the Middle East from despotic rulers, WMD, al Qaeda was a deadly miscalculation and an irreconcilable waste of lives, money and time. Egypt was one of our closest allies. It has been taken over by forces of the antichrist.

56 Comments

Before running stories you should always check to make sure they are true. Why are there no corroborating stories in main stream newspapers? Crucifixions would be headline news in all major news sources if it was true. The internet is 50% BS all ready. Please don't spread it even further.

Here we already have a half dozen people who never even questioned the story replying as if it was the unquestioned truth. Swallowed it whole and gulped it down. If you guys still haven't learned to fact check before you start believing stories, after all of the lies we've been fed from our government over the years, when will you ever learn?

You want photographs, or video clips, or streaming live video of a crucifixion in order to believe. Given that there is no free press in Egypt at the moment since the Muslim Brotherhood shut it down to stifle political opposition, supposedly.

“Confirming what a few have reported this evening: in an action unprecedented in Internet history, the Egyptian government appears to have ordered service providers to shut down all international connections to the Internet. Critical European-Asian fiber-optic routes through Egypt appear to be unaffected for now. But every Egyptian provider, every business, bank, Internet cafe, website, school, embassy, and government office that relied on the big four Egyptian ISPs for their Internet connectivity is now cut off from the rest of the world. Link Egypt, Vodafone/Raya, Telecom Egypt, Etisalat Misr, and all their customers and partners are, for the moment, off the air.”

In reality, there is little reason to doubt this crucifixion story. Militant Muslims crucifying their opponents is a regular feature of the Islamic world—recent cases coming from the Ivory Coast, where two Christian brothers were crucified, similarly by supporters of a Muslim president who ousted a Christian; Indonesia, where Islamic separatists crucified a fellow Muslim for being a military informant; and in Iraq, where Muslim militants crucified Christian children.

Your source claims a Sky News correspondent confirmed that people were crucified. A search at Sky News does not turn up any news about it. Until verified corroboration is included, the story is cruciFICTION.

There is no doubt the Arab Spring has been hijacked by the Muslim Brotherhood.

I think the problem here is that the assumption that free press and free speech are universal rights recognized in every regime is false.

After threats, Sky News, which was first to report about the crucifixions, has taken down its original article (though the URL still appears in the address box with the Arabic words “protesters-crucified-in front of-egypt’s-presidential-palace”).

Are we defending freedom of religion, too?

Not so fast.

Those alleged to have been crucified in Egypt certainly fit the Koran’s description of who deserves to be crucified. According to Allah, “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this: that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off…” (Koran 5:33).

Clearly members of the press not wanting to be murdered, crucified, dismembered or run out of the country have to comply with the Koran teachings enforced by the Muslim Brotherhood. The new Egyptian Constitution hasn't been written, yet. Will the protesters fight for a Bill of Rights?

This must be like writing the US Constitution while the Red Coats were still here in the colonies, armed and dangerous.

If anyone thought or hoped the Arab Spring would lead to a liberal Western-style democracy on the south shores of the Mediterranean, they were wrong. There would need to be another revolution to get rid of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Occupy Movements across Europe and North America must see the problem as it is. Bringing down a government is a lot easier than bringing up a new one. It probably won't be the government you want.

I don’t have a live feed to any new agency covering Arab politics. The story isn’t about crucifixion in Egypt. That is a footnote. The story is about the Arab Spring being hijacked.

There are reports that crucifixions did occur in Egypt.
Is there a larger context for crucifixions? Yes. The crucifixion is a symbol of terror used to control the masses with fear, humiliation and death.

Many demonstrations have met violent responses from authorities, as well as from pro-government militias and counter-demonstrators. These attacks have been answered with violence from protestors in some cases. A major slogan of the demonstrators in the Arab world has been Ash-shaʻb yurīd isqāṭ an-niẓām ("the people want to bring down the regime").

The Muslim Brotherhood candidate Mohamed Mursi, won with 51.7% of the vote.

In the first significant protest against Egypt’s new Islamist rulers, several thousand people rallied at Cairo’s landmark Tahrir Square accusing President Mohamed Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood of trying to monopolize power.

The rally was largely made-up of supporters of the former regime, combined with those demanding Egypt remains a secular state. Some Egyptians see the armed forces as the defenders of secularism, fending off the increasingly powerful Islamists.

When the rumors align with the persons own particular bias, their critical thinking skills shut down and allow all manner of garbage to fill their minds. If you could empty the minds of America on a table and sort out the fact from the fiction, the pile of fiction would rise a hundred times higher than the facts.

How about the Iraq War? Knowing what we know now, who could say USA should have invaded Iraq? Without the war Iraq was happier place under Saddam Hussein than it is today. Imagine thousands of Iraqis would still be alive. Iraqi power grid, transportation, medical facilities, education, agriculture, public safety, security and oil fields might be intact also.

Are we bankrupt? Are many of our cities drowning in debt? Did anyone doubt Iraq had WMD? Who benefitted from this war? Price of gas is around $4/gal here.

shit man why is the mass media didnt show to us about proxy war revolution? why dont you concern about feds spending your taxdollars on democrasy transformation overseas? what does it mean? and why dont you want to understand what im saying and why is it looks wierd to you?

The U.S. hijacked the Arab Spring last year by helping the monarchies in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Yemen crush their populations. They also took advantage of it in order to take over Libya. If you want to discuss the hijacking of the Arab Spring, these are the first things that should come to your mind.

The U.S. hijacked the Arab Spring last year by helping the monarchies in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Yemen crush their populations. They also took advantage of it in order to take over Libya. If you want to discuss the hijacking of the Arab Spring, these are the first things that should come to your mind.

No doubt. They see their mistake in not helping Mubarak remain in control rather than have Muslim gangsters get away with a bait and switch from liberal Democracy to Islamic Dictatorship implementing Shariah Law and establishing a Caliphate.

Plus the rulers of Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain are friendly with the West. Should the Western Alliance turn their backs on them? It's awkward. The French and the English beheaded their rulers when the people revolted. That's old hat today.Where should we stand? Shall we allow Mubarak to be beheaded after standing with the West for 30 years?

"The reason this happens is simple: creating or verifying a new standard of judgement or 'signal' takes effort in proportion to the complexity of the situation being evaluated. There is no real shortcut to this, so when signals are expected to be accurate the optimal strategy for most people would be to avoid confirming their validity. This habit is the cause of problems when the accuracy of signals shift due to a change in the underlying situation they're meant to indicate, and people refuse to evaluate new evidence until a catastrophic event forces them to see reality.

Two analogies for this: the first is that some materials can be permanently bent from the application of force, while others just shatter. The second is that a bullet only has about 1800 J of energy, which is the same amount absorbed from being in sunlight for three seconds or from eating 1/4 of a Tic Tac®."

The Arab Spring was presented to the West as the yearnings of liberal democracy straining against Muburak’s 30-year dictatorship and a Mburak dynasty. That was the signal I received.

They traded that in for rule by the Muslim Brotherhood and a new reign of terror. Was that election rigged? Or have Egyptians been fooled again?

There seems to be a new dictatorship condensing out of the mist to replace the old. The difference is its hostilities to Western values, such as a free press and free speech. They had that.

Given some of the other moves that Morsi and those around him have made, there is reason to be concerned. Morsi has appointed a new minister of information, Salah Abdul Maqsud; he, too, comes from the Muslim Brotherhood and actively supports the move to replace 50 leading editors and journalists. Charges have been filed against the editor of the independent opposition newspaperal-Dustour for insulting the president. It is probably no accident that the state media’s tone has changed markedly in the past week — and is far more favorable toward Morsi.

We invaded Iraq looking for WMD and ended up changing our excuse to "create democracy"; hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths later, we left the country. It isn't a surprise if Egypt's culture is also not completely prepared for a transition to a new kind of political system; after all, the US can't even take of its own poor and it is widely agreed to be the most powerful country in the world. Why should we expect 'democracy' to fix economic problems in other, poorer nations either?

second, since you brought it up, The US State Department is a great disseminator of misinformation about those who are a risk to our nation's interests, meaning "One nation's terrorist is another nation's freedom fighter."

I found myself near a militrary air show recently. While everyone marveled at the performance of these jets, I couldn't help think of the terror they invoke in so many innocent people. Ethnocentrism over-rides morality in this country unfortunately. We seem to be able to compartmentalize our values to only American lives lost.

Investigators say al Qaeda is implicated in the Libyan attack on the US Consulate.

Letting Qaddafi and Mburak go down left a pro-western vacuum. The US State Department was not in a position to alter the flow of events.

On the other hand Syria has hammered its civilians mercilessly. If Mburak and Qaddaffi had been as ruthless Lybia and Egypt would have been pacified. I think we have learned the lesson that not backing the current regime will allow militant Islamic extremist to gain a foothold.

i think al Qaeda more generically, as organized militant Islamic extremists fighting against US interests.

The world financial system is collapsing under decades of mismanagement. The act of toppling Saddam Hussein has destabilized governments throught the region from North Africa to Afghanistan. The USA cannot afford to start new wars.

There needs to be a move to end international welfare through the US. The UN should collect taxes from all participating members and handle welfare through the UN and absolutely no military aid should be given to any country or group for any reason. If there is reason enough for military aid there is reason enough for military intervention.

I have not been introduced to a member of the Muslim Brotherhood as such. That has as much relevance as personally knowing members of al Qaeda. The Washington Post reported that “Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood should know this. Egypt’s president and people should also know that we are prepared to mobilize the international community, and global financial institutions, to help Egypt — but that we will only do so if Egypt’s government is prepared to play by a set of rules grounded in reality and key principles. They must respect the rights of minorities and women; they must accept political pluralism and the space for open political competition; and they must respect their international obligations, including the terms of Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel.”
Does this sound like the Muslim Brotherhood is fundamentally different from any other Islamic Republic except Afghanistan and that Egypt doesn’t have any oil?

ain't it funny how we cherry pick what main stream news articles we believe? It is almost as if we believe the news we already believed.

Having studied Journalism, I believe journalists today are lazy. Instead of investigating the State department's claims, they reissue them verbatim.

Also do you believe are nation has enough trust and confidence of the international Community to mobilize any show down against any sovereign nation? Only a fool would be duped again by phantom demons.

I count crucifixions as killing each other. It's more than that.
If it was thought that crucifixions went the way of pagans in Rome by the time of the reign of Emperor Constantine, this is evidence of barbarism camoflaged by holier than thou Islamic sheepskins waiting to be unchained as soon as a critical mass is reached in a population.

Jews aren't perfect innocent models for peace, justice and freedom, but Jews aren't the problem or a major threat to core American beliefs at the moment. The USA, while it still has a Christian majority has to point Obama and American policies in the right direction.

Let's begin by saying crucifixions are legal under Sharia Law. Now consider that Egypt doesn't have a constitution and Egyptian President Morsi just grabbed dictatorial powers.

Newsmax reported:

While the world focused on Hamas militants launching rockets from Gaza at southern Israel, the terrorist organization also voted quietly to implement Islamic law in the Gaza Strip, including crucifixion of Christians, according to reports in the Arabic press.

The traditional Muslim criminal code, known as Sharia law, includes penalties such as amputation of limbs for stealing and the death penalty, including crucifixion, for actions Hamas deems detrimental to “Palestinian interests,” including collaborating with Israel.

Can and should the Egyptian military overthrow the Muslim Brotherhood?

During the military leadership of the country in the last few decades, female circumcision was criminalized, the minimum age of marriage for girls was 18 years old, and women were given the right to divorce their husbands for the first time.

Contrary to these secular attitudes, some of the earliest topics that have been discussed by the Islamist parliament after the revolution were to stop the ban on female circumcision, decrease the age of marriage for girls to 12 years, and end the right of Egyptian women to divorce their husbands.

The third reason why the Muslim Brotherhood is intensifying its pressure on the military in this critical time is that the latter — despite its mistakes — provides a shelter for the Christian minority and protects their economic interests.

The Muslim Brotherhood knows well that creating pressure on these Christian minorities — including limiting their personal freedoms and ignoring violent acts against them — will ultimately force many of the them to leave the country and thus sell their assets with a very low price to the wealthy members of the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamists. In such a case, the Muslim Brotherhood can have a tight grip over Egypt and start the first step in their agenda of reinstituting the Islamic caliphate.

The Muslim Brotherhood also wants to weaken the military because the military is committed to protecting the peace treaty with Israel and, in contrast to the Muslim Brotherhood which has very strong ties with the Hamas organization — is unlikely to cooperate with radical groups such as the Hamas organization in Gaza.

It’s no longer a question about should the military take over the Egyptian government. They have done it. This is a very bizarre development for a democracy: the people could not wait for the next election to get rid of their government, so the military staged a coupe d’etat. OWS could send a delegation now to see how that works.

The funny thing about this is that Egypt ends up with an even more brutal dictatorship than the one they replaced. The tourism, hotels, restaurants catering to Westerners liberalized Egypt. Now this all could go away.

I think Egypt was the one genuine revolution in the whole "Arab Spring", since it seemed to be a popular movement, not a bunch of mercenaries claiming to be "freedom fighters". That went awry quite quickly though.

“What they lacked was clarity in method and a centralized leading organization.”

OWS is only one occupation movement among many other movements. There should be real results when the political national conventions face the Occupy Movement. The Occupy Movement outnumbers the delegations to both conventions. That’s the good news. The bad news would be rioting worse than in Chicago 1968. It took almost 50 years to recover from that.

I didn't say that I agreed with Trotsky, only that his essay was a good read on his perceptions of why a populist revolution failed, though the insurgents had the best of intentions and implemented a workable true democracy.

I don't believe there will be any positive results from the political conventions inside or outside of the convention centers.

Please, don't provide me links to videos. I won't watch them. If you want to provide a link, provide it to a written source, so that I can analyze it properly.